Sold a Car that has broken down HELP ASAP
Discussion
To confirm...
I changed all the oils and fluids on the car before going bar brake fluid as that had been done prior to me getting the car in June.
After returning from Germany, I changed the oil and filter again, for peace of mind. I didn't have any plans to sell the car at this point, but I knew it would be up for sale before the end of the year. That was always the plan with the car, I've always wanted to own one and wanted to do so before buying a house. The road trip was just an excuse to see a beautiful city, and to do some miles in a beautiful car. It was excellent.
I changed all the oils and fluids on the car before going bar brake fluid as that had been done prior to me getting the car in June.
After returning from Germany, I changed the oil and filter again, for peace of mind. I didn't have any plans to sell the car at this point, but I knew it would be up for sale before the end of the year. That was always the plan with the car, I've always wanted to own one and wanted to do so before buying a house. The road trip was just an excuse to see a beautiful city, and to do some miles in a beautiful car. It was excellent.
Whilst on what we have been told by the OP the buyer appears to have a weak claim, I would not recommend that the OP should refuse to communicate with the buyer. If the buyer decides to sue, then silence from the OP will not reflect well on him in court. Better to respond in a measured and civil manner, politely refusing to accept liability. NB, we do not know if the OP made any remarks while the buyer was looking at the car before buying which could be relied on as a representation. GIGO, so we are dependent on the OP giving us the full story in order to make any meaningful suggestions.
Variomatic said:
eccles said:
Perfectly normal behaviour I would have thought.
Whilst sat for hours in the KFC car park awaiting recovery of his newly purchased car that has gone bang just after buying it, he's availing himself of KFC's free wifi and asking on some dodgy car forum what his options are. Clearly he's been advised to get in there with the scary email, making sure to use the phrase 'without prejudice' at least once so it makes it look as if he knows what he's talking about.
Sounds more than plausible, in which case I'd suggest a response along the following lines. Perhaps BV could help fine tune it?Whilst sat for hours in the KFC car park awaiting recovery of his newly purchased car that has gone bang just after buying it, he's availing himself of KFC's free wifi and asking on some dodgy car forum what his options are. Clearly he's been advised to get in there with the scary email, making sure to use the phrase 'without prejudice' at least once so it makes it look as if he knows what he's talking about.
Google Lawyer said:
Without prejudice
Dear Mr <insert name here>,
Re: Purchase of vehicle xx yy zz under private contract of sale, dated xx yyy 2015 AD, governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 [1979 c.54] (as amended) and the common law principle of Caveat Emptor
Further to our correspondence to date: whilst I have every sympathy for your situation, I maintain that the condition of the vehicle, at the time of purchase, was in accordance with the descriptions provided by me, in both the written advertisement and subsequent oral discussion, and that the price agreed and paid was commensurate with that condition. That being the case, I hereby deny and repudiate all and any claims by you for rescission of the contract and also for compensation for any subsequent and incidental losses that you may accrue.
Notwithstanding the above, and without prejudice nor admission of liability, I have previously offered to make a voluntary donation of two hundred and fifty pounds, Sterling, (£250.00) as a contribution towards your recovery costs. I am prepared to stand by that offer for a period of seven (7) days from receipt by you of this letter which, in accordance with s. 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 [1978 c.30], shall be deemed to take place one (1) working day after it is posted, being the normal delivery time for first class letter post. I shall additionally allow a further two (2) days for you to write and deliver your response should you wish to reply by post. Beyond that time limit my offer of assistance shall be withdrawn and I shall consider the matter closed. Should you decide to take any further action I shall defend my position to the full extent of the law.
I must further advise you that, aside and apart from acceptance of my offer or the issuance of court papers, I shall consider any further attempt by you to contact me, about this or any other matter, to be harassment as defined by s.7(1)(2) of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 [1997 c.40] in that it is causing me alarm and distress.
Such harassment shall not be tolerated and will be reported for consideration of prosecution for the offence of harassment under s.2 of the same Act, as well as forming the basis for civil action under s.3 including, but not limited to, damages for the anxiety so caused to me.
I look forward to hearing from you and trust that this matter can now be put behind us.
Yours sincerely,
Another Google User.
Dear Mr <insert name here>,
Re: Purchase of vehicle xx yy zz under private contract of sale, dated xx yyy 2015 AD, governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 [1979 c.54] (as amended) and the common law principle of Caveat Emptor
Further to our correspondence to date: whilst I have every sympathy for your situation, I maintain that the condition of the vehicle, at the time of purchase, was in accordance with the descriptions provided by me, in both the written advertisement and subsequent oral discussion, and that the price agreed and paid was commensurate with that condition. That being the case, I hereby deny and repudiate all and any claims by you for rescission of the contract and also for compensation for any subsequent and incidental losses that you may accrue.
Notwithstanding the above, and without prejudice nor admission of liability, I have previously offered to make a voluntary donation of two hundred and fifty pounds, Sterling, (£250.00) as a contribution towards your recovery costs. I am prepared to stand by that offer for a period of seven (7) days from receipt by you of this letter which, in accordance with s. 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 [1978 c.30], shall be deemed to take place one (1) working day after it is posted, being the normal delivery time for first class letter post. I shall additionally allow a further two (2) days for you to write and deliver your response should you wish to reply by post. Beyond that time limit my offer of assistance shall be withdrawn and I shall consider the matter closed. Should you decide to take any further action I shall defend my position to the full extent of the law.
I must further advise you that, aside and apart from acceptance of my offer or the issuance of court papers, I shall consider any further attempt by you to contact me, about this or any other matter, to be harassment as defined by s.7(1)(2) of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 [1997 c.40] in that it is causing me alarm and distress.
Such harassment shall not be tolerated and will be reported for consideration of prosecution for the offence of harassment under s.2 of the same Act, as well as forming the basis for civil action under s.3 including, but not limited to, damages for the anxiety so caused to me.
I look forward to hearing from you and trust that this matter can now be put behind us.
Yours sincerely,
Another Google User.
Breadvan72 said:
Whilst on what we have been told by the OP the buyer appears to have a weak claim, I would not recommend that the OP should refuse to communicate with the buyer. If the buyer decides to sue, then silence from the OP will not reflect well on him in court. Better to respond in a measured and civil manner, politely refusing to accept liability. NB, we do not know if the OP made any remarks while the buyer was looking at the car before buying which could be relied on as a representation. GIGO, so we are dependent on the OP giving us the full story in order to make any meaningful suggestions.
Of course I don't recall exactly what words were said in the 30 minutes or so that they were here.I showed them around the car, how the roof works, how the boot opens, that usual stuff.
What could I have said that wrong?
DanielJames said:
Breadvan72 said:
Whilst on what we have been told by the OP the buyer appears to have a weak claim, I would not recommend that the OP should refuse to communicate with the buyer. If the buyer decides to sue, then silence from the OP will not reflect well on him in court. Better to respond in a measured and civil manner, politely refusing to accept liability. NB, we do not know if the OP made any remarks while the buyer was looking at the car before buying which could be relied on as a representation. GIGO, so we are dependent on the OP giving us the full story in order to make any meaningful suggestions.
Of course I don't recall exactly what words were said in the 30 minutes or so that they were here.I showed them around the car, how the roof works, how the boot opens, that usual stuff.
What could I have said that wrong?
Was the guy himself or was someone else with him? If he was himself he'll have a hell of a job trying to evidence anything that you said in any case.
R8Steve said:
The engines in these are bulletproof?
I can't see that being seen as fraudulent misrepresentation. i would see it has never been track raced, not owned by a boy racer, etc when evidence is found to the contrary. If the op knew the engine was on it way out, i.e burned oil, metal on sump plug,etc and remained silent, and stated runs perfect, about that I am pretty sure that could be misrepresentation.
Wacky Racer said:
The law is on your side, unless you put in writing "good runner", "as new" etc.
Not necessarily in a civil case. The buyer may claim that he asked something like "are there any problems with the engine?" and the Op replied "No, just had it to Munich and it drove like a charm. Doesn't even use oil like most of these do!"
Given that the question is one that any sensible car buyer would ask, and the answer is a reasonable one, supported by comments in the written advert about the trip, the judge is likely to conclude that those statements were made - it only needs to be "more likely than not" that they did. It's certainly more likely than not that the buyer (any sensible buyer) would ask a question like that, and at least as likely as not that the answer would have been along those lines.
If the OP has since been an uncooperative git who's ignored all attempts at contact until court papers arrived then that will inevitably colour the court's view of his general decency and trustworthiness. That may be enough to tip the balance in the buyer's favour when it comes down to judging the likely merits of word-against-word.
Variomatic said:
Sounds more than plausible, in which case I'd suggest a response along the following lines. Perhaps BV could help fine tune it?
I would fine tune that letter by throwing it in the bin. Forget all the faux lawyer BS. Write briefly and in plain English. Do not add the words "Without prejudice" unless offering a compromise, and in that event you won't be able to show the letter to the Court. State your position openly. If you want to make an offer, do so in a separate letter headed without prejudice or, better still, without prejudice save as to costs. IF the facts are as stated by the OP, then the only basis for any offer is to avoid hassle.Google Lawyer said:
Without prejudice
Dear Mr <insert name here>,
Re: Purchase of vehicle xx yy zz under private contract of sale, dated xx yyy 2015 AD, governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 [1979 c.54] (as amended) and the common law principle of Caveat Emptor
Further to our correspondence to date: whilst I have every sympathy for your situation, I maintain that the condition of the vehicle, at the time of purchase, was in accordance with the descriptions provided by me, in both the written advertisement and subsequent oral discussion, and that the price agreed and paid was commensurate with that condition. That being the case, I hereby deny and repudiate all and any claims by you for rescission of the contract and also for compensation for any subsequent and incidental losses that you may accrue.
Notwithstanding the above, and without prejudice nor admission of liability, I have previously offered to make a voluntary donation of two hundred and fifty pounds, Sterling, (£250.00) as a contribution towards your recovery costs. I am prepared to stand by that offer for a period of seven (7) days from receipt by you of this letter which, in accordance with s. 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 [1978 c.30], shall be deemed to take place one (1) working day after it is posted, being the normal delivery time for first class letter post. I shall additionally allow a further two (2) days for you to write and deliver your response should you wish to reply by post. Beyond that time limit my offer of assistance shall be withdrawn and I shall consider the matter closed. Should you decide to take any further action I shall defend my position to the full extent of the law.
I must further advise you that, aside and apart from acceptance of my offer or the issuance of court papers, I shall consider any further attempt by you to contact me, about this or any other matter, to be harassment as defined by s.7(1)(2) of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 [1997 c.40] in that it is causing me alarm and distress.
Such harassment shall not be tolerated and will be reported for consideration of prosecution for the offence of harassment under s.2 of the same Act, as well as forming the basis for civil action under s.3 including, but not limited to, damages for the anxiety so caused to me.
I look forward to hearing from you and trust that this matter can now be put behind us.
Yours sincerely,
Another Google User.
Dear Mr <insert name here>,
Re: Purchase of vehicle xx yy zz under private contract of sale, dated xx yyy 2015 AD, governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 [1979 c.54] (as amended) and the common law principle of Caveat Emptor
Further to our correspondence to date: whilst I have every sympathy for your situation, I maintain that the condition of the vehicle, at the time of purchase, was in accordance with the descriptions provided by me, in both the written advertisement and subsequent oral discussion, and that the price agreed and paid was commensurate with that condition. That being the case, I hereby deny and repudiate all and any claims by you for rescission of the contract and also for compensation for any subsequent and incidental losses that you may accrue.
Notwithstanding the above, and without prejudice nor admission of liability, I have previously offered to make a voluntary donation of two hundred and fifty pounds, Sterling, (£250.00) as a contribution towards your recovery costs. I am prepared to stand by that offer for a period of seven (7) days from receipt by you of this letter which, in accordance with s. 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 [1978 c.30], shall be deemed to take place one (1) working day after it is posted, being the normal delivery time for first class letter post. I shall additionally allow a further two (2) days for you to write and deliver your response should you wish to reply by post. Beyond that time limit my offer of assistance shall be withdrawn and I shall consider the matter closed. Should you decide to take any further action I shall defend my position to the full extent of the law.
I must further advise you that, aside and apart from acceptance of my offer or the issuance of court papers, I shall consider any further attempt by you to contact me, about this or any other matter, to be harassment as defined by s.7(1)(2) of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 [1997 c.40] in that it is causing me alarm and distress.
Such harassment shall not be tolerated and will be reported for consideration of prosecution for the offence of harassment under s.2 of the same Act, as well as forming the basis for civil action under s.3 including, but not limited to, damages for the anxiety so caused to me.
I look forward to hearing from you and trust that this matter can now be put behind us.
Yours sincerely,
Another Google User.
Breadvan72 said:
I would fine tune that letter by throwing it in the bin. Forget all the faux lawyer BS. Write briefly and in plain English. Do not add the words "Without prejudice" unless offering a compromise, and in that event you won't be able to show the letter to the Court. State your position openly. If you want to make an offer, do so in a separate letter headed without prejudice or, better still, without prejudice save as to costs. IF the facts are as stated by the OP, then the only basis for any offer is to avoid hassle.
Aww, I was so hoping you'd come out to play this afternoon! Then again, I suppose someone might actually have taken the suggestion seriously given what gets thrown round on forums. So you were probably right to suggest binning
Just a thought.. I bought my Z4MC over a year ago in a private sale from a chap who seemed a decent enough family guy etc. He had owned the car for a year and had no servicing done in that time (service schedule was fine though), lived in London and had covered around 5k. He sold it to me for what he paid. I test drove the car and having previously had an e46 m3 (same engine) I felt reasonably satisfied that the car was in decent health. It was due an oil service imminently, I booked it into my m3 specialist indy to have a full inspection II for piece of mind perhaps 2 weeks later.
Car looked, drove and sounded fine right until the point the garage dropped the oil and lifted the cam cover in order to do the valve clearances.
Long of short of it was that the cams and followers were completely fubar. Cue ~3k bill for top end rebuild.
I knew I did not have a leg to stand on with the seller in terms of asking for money from him, I honestly believe he did not know anything about the problem, even my shop (who deal with the S54 engine all the time) thought it sounded fine. It was not however a problem that I could have created within those 2 weeks and it certainly looked like the last garage had put the incorrect oil in. In any case, not his problem.
I did however drop him a polite note noting my disappointment. I received a msg the next day that he had spoken with his wife and that they would like to contribute to half of the costs. I was pretty staggered as I hadn't even asked him for any money.
I realise the OP's situation is somewhat different (like the fact I didn't send a nasty demand like his buyer) and that yes, he has zero obligation to be involved in this at all, however if he does think this guy is genuine then I would consider offering to help somewhat. What goes around, comes around after all right?
Car looked, drove and sounded fine right until the point the garage dropped the oil and lifted the cam cover in order to do the valve clearances.
Long of short of it was that the cams and followers were completely fubar. Cue ~3k bill for top end rebuild.
I knew I did not have a leg to stand on with the seller in terms of asking for money from him, I honestly believe he did not know anything about the problem, even my shop (who deal with the S54 engine all the time) thought it sounded fine. It was not however a problem that I could have created within those 2 weeks and it certainly looked like the last garage had put the incorrect oil in. In any case, not his problem.
I did however drop him a polite note noting my disappointment. I received a msg the next day that he had spoken with his wife and that they would like to contribute to half of the costs. I was pretty staggered as I hadn't even asked him for any money.
I realise the OP's situation is somewhat different (like the fact I didn't send a nasty demand like his buyer) and that yes, he has zero obligation to be involved in this at all, however if he does think this guy is genuine then I would consider offering to help somewhat. What goes around, comes around after all right?
Edited by MOTK on Monday 31st August 17:39
Variomatic said:
Wacky Racer said:
The law is on your side, unless you put in writing "good runner", "as new" etc.
Not necessarily in a civil case. The buyer may claim that he asked something like "are there any problems with the engine?" and the Op replied "No, just had it to Munich and it drove like a charm. Doesn't even use oil like most of these do!"
Given that the question is one that any sensible car buyer would ask, and the answer is a reasonable one, supported by comments in the written advert about the trip, the judge is likely to conclude that those statements were made - it only needs to be "more likely than not" that they did. It's certainly more likely than not that the buyer (any sensible buyer) would ask a question like that, and at least as likely as not that the answer would have been along those lines.
If the OP has since been an uncooperative git who's ignored all attempts at contact until court papers arrived then that will inevitably colour the court's view of his general decency and trustworthiness. That may be enough to tip the balance in the buyer's favour when it comes down to judging the likely merits of word-against-word.
MOTK said:
Just a thought.. I bought my Z4MC over a year ago in a private sale from a chap who seemed a decent enough family guy etc. He had owned the car for a year and had no servicing done in that time (service schedule was fine though), lived in London and had covered around 5k. He sold it to me for what he paid. I test drove the car and having previously had an e46 m3 (same engine) I felt reasonably satisfied that the car was in decent health. It was due an oil service imminently, I booked it into my m3 specialist indy to have a full inspection II for piece of mind perhaps 2 weeks later.
Car looked, drove and sounded fine right until the point the garage dropped the oil and lifted the cam cover in order to do the valve clearances.
Long of short of it was that the cams and followers were completely fubar. Cue ~3k bill for top end rebuild.
I knew I did not have a leg to stand on with the seller in terms of asking for money from him, I honestly believe he did not know anything about the problem, even my shop (who deal with the S54 engine all the time) thought it sounded fine. It was not however a problem that I could have created within those 2 weeks and it certainly looked like the last garage had put the incorrect oil in. In any case, not his problem.
I did however drop him a polite note noting my disappointment. I received a msg the next day that he had spoken with his wife and that they would like to contribute to half of the costs. I was pretty staggered as I hadn't even asked him for any money.
I realise the OP's situation is somewhat different (like the fact I didn't send a nasty demand like his buyer) and that yes, he has zero obligation to be involved in this at all, however if he does think this guy is genuine then I would consider offering to help somewhat. What goes around, comes around after all right?
That's a great story, and I was all for that... until after leaving he sent the email as noted in an earlier post mentioning legal action. Car looked, drove and sounded fine right until the point the garage dropped the oil and lifted the cam cover in order to do the valve clearances.
Long of short of it was that the cams and followers were completely fubar. Cue ~3k bill for top end rebuild.
I knew I did not have a leg to stand on with the seller in terms of asking for money from him, I honestly believe he did not know anything about the problem, even my shop (who deal with the S54 engine all the time) thought it sounded fine. It was not however a problem that I could have created within those 2 weeks and it certainly looked like the last garage had put the incorrect oil in. In any case, not his problem.
I did however drop him a polite note noting my disappointment. I received a msg the next day that he had spoken with his wife and that they would like to contribute to half of the costs. I was pretty staggered as I hadn't even asked him for any money.
I realise the OP's situation is somewhat different (like the fact I didn't send a nasty demand like his buyer) and that yes, he has zero obligation to be involved in this at all, however if he does think this guy is genuine then I would consider offering to help somewhat. What goes around, comes around after all right?
Edited by MOTK on Monday 31st August 17:39
The Spruce goose said:
jeff666 said:
The OP's advert mentioned Yellow stuff pads, could it be the car had been tracked in the
past ?
he went to the 'burg', i think.past ?
i think hard driving or track use is what buyer aiming at.
This is a sports car after all. You'd expect that it's had its neck run once in a while. It's not like I bought it, thrashed the f
k out of it and sold it on. I did all the proper maintenance to the car before even thinking of pushing it.DanielJames said:
They were in the car before I got it, but I don't get where you're going with this.
I think where they're going are the same places that the buyer might go if he does try a court claim. Regardless of the facts (on which I don't personally doubt you btw), that's probably a more productive use of the thread than repeat posts saying "he hasn't got a leg to stand on, caveat emptor, flip him off" 
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff